文献认为儿童既是服用益生菌菌株的风险群体,也是可以从中受益最多的人群之一。由于与益生菌补充剂相关的健康益处,本范围审查旨在对鼠李糖乳杆菌GG,在食物和非食物基质中携带,和实验设计可能会影响婴儿和儿童的健康促进。在这项研究中,在三个科学数据库中进行了文献检索:PubMed,WebofScience,和SciELO来检索研究,以英文或西班牙文出版,对患有任何疾病或处于富营养化状态的婴儿和儿童施用鼠李糖乳杆菌GG。三位评审专家在专家的监督下筛选了540篇文章,发表于2001年至2022年之间,从数据库中检索。提取的数据已汇总并显示在此范围审查中。总的来说,包括在内,经过标准观察,这篇评论中有44篇文章。肠道疾病是这些研究中最常见的结果(36.4%)和胶囊,施用益生菌菌株的最常见载体(40.9%)。益生菌菌株的剂量范围为105至1012cfu/鼠李糖乳杆菌GG的剂量,干预时间从1个月延长至6个月以上。食品基质在57.1%的临床试验中显示出健康影响,非食品基质为46.7%,这表明益生菌GG菌株的健康促进作用在两种递送形式之间可能是等同的。然而,高度异质性的实验设计阻碍了进一步的分析,建议进行系统评价和荟萃分析,仅针对研究结果并实现数据同质性,以确定哪种载体最适合促进健康.
The literature considers children both a risk group for administering probiotic strains and one of the populations that can most benefit from it. Due to the health benefits associated to probiotic supplementation, this scope
review sought to formulate a critical evaluation of how Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG, carried in food and non-food matrices, and experimental design may affect the health promotion of infants and children. In this study, a literature search was conducted in three scientific databases: PubMed, Web of Science, and SciELO to retrieve research, published in English or Spanish, which administered L. rhamnosus GG to infants and children with any disease or in eutrophic condition. Three reviewers with an expert supervision screened 540 articles, published between 2001 and 2022, which were retrieved from the databases. The data extracted was compiled and shown in this scoping
review. In total, was included, after criteria observation, 44 articles in this
review. Intestinal disorders were the most frequent outcome in these studies (36.4%) and capsules, the most common vehicle for administering the probiotic strain (40.9%). Probiotic strain dose ranged from 105 to 1012 cfu/dose of L. rhamnosus GG and intervention length extended from one to more than 6 months. Food matrix showed health effects in 57.1% of the clinical trials and non-food matrix 46.7%, which indicates that the health-promoting effect of the probiotic GG strain may be equivalent between the two forms of delivery. However, the highly heterogeneous experimental designs prevent further analysis and a systematic
review and meta-analysis is recommended to address just the outcomes of studies and achieve data homogeneity in order to determine which vehicle is the most suitable for health promoting.